Merci impeachment divides Cebu solons

CEBU, Philippines - Cebuano lawmakers were divided in the historic vote Tuesday dawn to impeach Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez for alleged betrayal of public trust and culpable violation of the Constitution.

After eight hours of deliberation, 212 members of the House of Representatives voted to impeach Gutierrez while only 46 voted against it with four abstentions.

 At least six Cebuano solons, including two partylist representatives, voted “yes.” They are Reps. Rachel “Cutie” del Mar of the Cebu City-North District; Tomas Osmeña of the Cebu City-South District; Eduardo Gullas of the First District; Ramon “Red” Durano VI of the Fifth District; Luigi Quisumbing of the Sixth District and Trade Union Congress of the Philippines Partylist Rep. Raymund Democrito Mendoza.

Four lawmakers voted “no.” They are Father and son, Reps. Pablo Garcia of the Second District and Pablo John Garcia of the Third District, respectively; Benhur Salimbangon of the Fourth District and Pastor Alcover Jr. of ANAD Partylist.

Lapu-Lapu City Rep. Arturo Radaza, however, was absent during the vote.

This is the first time in the country’s history that the chief graft buster has been impeached.

Del Mar said she voted “yes” for the approval of the justice committee report as she finds probable cause to impeach Gutierrez of the complaints against her.

Osmena, on the other hand, said the decision to impeach Gutierrez does not mean she is guilty.

 “I’m not voting “yes” because we want to put her in jail. We just say that people are no longer happy the way she runs the office,” Osmena said.

Gullas and Durano said they supported the impeachment because the ombudsman was never given the chance to defend herself in the House of Representatives.

“I vote “yes” to give Merceditas Gutierrez her Constitutional right of due process and the opportunity to answer in the Senate which was denied her by the House,” Gullas said.

For Pablo John, he voted “no” because he is against the “very same complaint in the last congress.”

“Nothing has changed, except the administration and the President. It’s the same weak complaint, except this time, it is compounded by the fact that due process was not observed,” the 3rd District Congressman said.

Alcover said he voted “no” because he was not convinced that there was probable cause to impeach Ombudsman Gutierrez.

“The Articles of Impeachment, as submitted by the House’s Justice Committee, contains the trappings of a vendetta,” said Alcover.

He was referring to the fact that most of the members of the House’s Justice Committee have pending cases before the Ombudsman, including the father of Rep. Neil Tupaz, chairman of the justice committee.

Salimbangon said he finds it unfair for Gutierrez to be accused of betrayal of public trust and culpable violation of the Constitution considering that the structure of her office does not provide a very effective way for expedient prosecution of cases.

The Articles of Impeachment, which will be transmitted to the Senate for trial, contained in House Bill 1089 cites inaction on the following cases : fertilizer scam; $329.5 million controversial National Broadband Network-ZTE telecommunications deal; Mega Pacific poll automation contract; Euro-Generals cases; 1995 death of Navy Ensign Phillip Pestaño; low conviction rates.

Under Section 3, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution, the impeachment case against the Ombudsman would have to get a one-third vote of all House members (95 ) before it can be transmitted to the Senate for trial.

In the Senate, two-thirds vote of all senators — 16 out of the 23 senators—is needed to convict the Ombudsman. –/FPL (FREEMAN)